The closer the cache is to the processor, the faster it moves. Essentially, cache stores data in the pipeline, sort of like having a batter in the box, it's faster getting the batter to the plate than moving him all the way from the dugout, plus he's warmed up and ready to go.

As closer cache (to the processor) moves more quickly, less is needed the closer it is. The combo they're using of L2 and L3 cache in the middle option is pretty damn good, IMHO.

I think the 2.66Ghz i7 is probably the best value here- you WANT hyperthreading. The quad core i7 processes eight threads simultaneously (think parallel computing... in addition to more processing cores, each core can complete two tasks at once instead of one). Also, for ten bucks more than the 2.88Ghz option, you're getting level 2 and level 3 cache, plus QPI for more memory bandwidth. (Okay, that's not all... it's a completely new way for the processor to talk to memory and other components) For an overall more robust computing experience, I'd definitely take that over the extra 1.34Ghz CPU speed. The only other concern may be wattage, if you're energy-conscious.

For the Gigabyte logic board, I lost my notes, but the model GA-P55M-UD2 or model GA-EX58-UD5 should work with either the i5 or i7.

This is a pretty good article on hyperthreading. Wikipedia has one as well.Here's a good one on QPI.

Edited by Antonio (12/31/0910:45 AM)Edit Reason: added info

_________________________“Creative ability is best displayed with the most basic tools."

How will the motherboards cost less? This is a hackintosh, he wants to run OS X- he's going to be limited by what he can actually use, much more than by cost.

As for your assumption that the 860 is faster out of the box, it depends on what he intends to do with the machine (yeah, same old argument, but as you'll see at the linked test at the bottom, with a few caveats). There are many cases for which the 920 would be preferable, and it is an all-around superior platform to the 860, hands-down. As the prices are so close, even if he's only going to be doing everyday consumer-level stuff, it's still a better choice, because for the everyday stuff (word processing, iTunes stuff, etc, etc) there'd likely be no noticeable difference in performance and the prices are so close (so go for the better offering). If he wants to do things such as video encoding or heavy-lifting with Photoshop, the 920 will likely best the 860 by a decent margin.

Here is a good comparison, not just between these two processors, but alongside the i5, Core2 Quad, and AMD's offering (AMD... HAHAHA, whatever :oP ). Their tests would appear to reveal that the 920 is, per cycle, faster than the 860. However, they seem to prefer the i5 for overall value (price-to-performance ratio), and that may be something to consider.

_________________________“Creative ability is best displayed with the most basic tools."

Another thing I'll mention, where I disagree with some of the benchmarks listed, is that I don't think those tests gave a fair estimate of the i7's hyperthreading capability. Hyperthreading is for multitasking, so that is when it is going to shine brightest.

It would be nice if someone, at some point, conducted some 'real world' testing, by maybe encoding some audio or video, while playing it back, while running a Photoshop filter.

_________________________“Creative ability is best displayed with the most basic tools."

How will the motherboards cost less? This is a hackintosh, he wants to run OS X- he's going to be limited by what he can actually use, much more than by cost.

LGA 1156 boards are generally cheaper than 1366 boards. Of course there are plenty of 1156 boards more expensive, all depends on what goodies are included.

As for tests, I've seen plenty of reviews showing the 860 is faster out of the box (notice I don't mention overclocking) than the 920, plus it's more energy efficient which is always a good thing. Of course, as you mention it's a hackintosh, so compatibility is more important, and the prices are going to be pretty close anyway. Hyperthreading is too overrated to even be a consideration IMO, but the

Also the 920's are being phased out, new chips are going the way of the 860's design.

Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.

All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.